Hand held a 600mm lens without IS? Ridiculous, and that's not even taking into account that it must have weighed a ton holding that thing. Must have some pretty big guns lol (not talking about lenses)

its MF only too

the technique I use was set the lens to minimum focus distance, held the lens and camera lookign through the viewfinder, advance slowly then when the image came into focus drop onto one knee kind of in a kneeling rifle shooting position and snapped of a short burst, (only 3 shots, 2 of which were sharp.

definately not a lens that you can handhold often or for too long since the lens is 4.5kg and the 1D is 1.3kg its quite a beefy combo, much more comfy on a gimbal

Hand held a 600mm lens without IS? Ridiculous, and that's not even taking into account that it must have weighed a ton holding that thing. Must have some pretty big guns lol (not talking about lenses)

its MF only too

the technique I use was set the lens to minimum focus distance, held the lens and camera lookign through the viewfinder, advance slowly then when the image came into focus drop onto one knee kind of in a kneeling rifle shooting position and snapped of a short burst, (only 3 shots, 2 of which were sharp.

definately not a lens that you can handhold often or for too long since the lens is 4.5kg and the 1D is 1.3kg its quite a beefy combo, much more comfy on a gimbal

Awesome shot. How much does that lens go for? (Too tired to look it up.)

Hand held a 600mm lens without IS? Ridiculous, and that's not even taking into account that it must have weighed a ton holding that thing. Must have some pretty big guns lol (not talking about lenses)

its MF only too

the technique I use was set the lens to minimum focus distance, held the lens and camera lookign through the viewfinder, advance slowly then when the image came into focus drop onto one knee kind of in a kneeling rifle shooting position and snapped of a short burst, (only 3 shots, 2 of which were sharp.

definately not a lens that you can handhold often or for too long since the lens is 4.5kg and the 1D is 1.3kg its quite a beefy combo, much more comfy on a gimbal

Awesome shot. How much does that lens go for? (Too tired to look it up.)

Hand held a 600mm lens without IS? Ridiculous, and that's not even taking into account that it must have weighed a ton holding that thing. Must have some pretty big guns lol (not talking about lenses)

its MF only too

the technique I use was set the lens to minimum focus distance, held the lens and camera lookign through the viewfinder, advance slowly then when the image came into focus drop onto one knee kind of in a kneeling rifle shooting position and snapped of a short burst, (only 3 shots, 2 of which were sharp.

definately not a lens that you can handhold often or for too long since the lens is 4.5kg and the 1D is 1.3kg its quite a beefy combo, much more comfy on a gimbal

Awesome shot. How much does that lens go for? (Too tired to look it up.)

The bulk of my business involves photographing moving boats - usually from other moving boats.Because of the conditions I work in, I need weather-sealed cameras. I generally use the 1DS and sometimes 1D bodies and most of the time need a long lens. The larger sensor makes the 300mm the most useful lens for me.I've owned two copies of the 2.8 L over the past 20 years. They both have been outstanding performers. Many times, though, I'll need a little more reach, so I have to resort to glass in the 400 to 600 range. Frequently, I'll use a teleconverter, the later versions of the EX 1.4x trade off very little other than a stop of speed, but once in a while a 400/2.8 or 600/4 is needed. By the end of a long day, I certainly feel I've gotten a good workout.

So, my hat is off to anyone who can successfully use these "big guns". The good news is, after working with one over a couple days, it kind of makes using a 300/2.8 child's play.

Not having AF or IS makes the lens simpler, lighter, and much more reliable. I tried handholding my EF 600mm f/4 (non IS), I could do it for less than a minute and only after removing the hood to shed weight out on the far end. Since it is a fairly fast lens, cranking up shutter speed to 1/2000 in bright light was no issue. I think that lens was the heaviest regular production lens that Canon made. A little heavier than its brother 400mm f/2.8 non is.After that one occasion, I never tried again.

canon rumors FORUM

Reviving an old topic, how is the lens after two years, any more pics, i am considering getting one, they come and go on ebay for around $1600, i know its cheap when compared to the EF version, there is also the 300mm f/2.8 for around the same price.

Reviving an old topic, how is the lens after two years, any more pics, i am considering getting one, they come and go on ebay for around $1600, i know its cheap when compared to the EF version, there is also the 300mm f/2.8 for around the same price.

hey to be honest haven't used it too much for stills but actually used it quite a big for shooting video of archery because the focus wheels can be moved smoothly easily without introducing vibration. I think this lens is amazing for long range video. especially for the money.

but now I have the tamron 150-600 i would say the tamron is generally better but it still cant hit f4.5 like this can but it does have IS and AF although you need to turn IS off for panning. I wont sell the FD because i like it and its sort of an antique now but generally for most situations the tamron or new sigma 150-600 will be a better choice for less money